LDS Freedom Forum

natasha wrote:Guys...IF push comes to shove...the Church will stop civil marriages in our Temples and only sealings will be performed. They would probably also stop any civil marriages being performed in any of our chapels. Bishops would forgo the license to "marry".....and officiators in the temple would know longer have a "license" to marry....but no one can take away their keys of sealing.

Geoff wrote:This is an interesting discussion, but only time will tell what the Church will do.

One thing seems fairly clear to me: you can't have it both ways. You can't support anti-discrimination legislation for both religions and anti-religious groups. Why? Because they are mutually exclusive. The LGBT is a perfect case in point. The LDS Church discriminates against LGBT's in both doctrine and practice: practicing LGBT's (if known) are not permitted to participate in of any of the ordinances, including sacrament, baptism, entering and anything in the temple, marriage (temple or by a bishop), etc. For the Church to argue for certain "civil rights" for LGBT's, such as equal rights and anti-discrimination for housing and employment, on one hand, but argue at the same time on the other hand for protection of religious freedom in its own discriminating practices against LGBT's, i.e. prohibiting their participation or eligibility in the religion (particularly for those with LDS heritage as religion has become largely cultural), as well as for protection of individual religious freedoms such as religious doctors not having to perform abortions or artificial inseminations for gay couples, etc. - do you not see where this is going? The government won't draw squiggly lines like this. You can't have it both ways: anti-discrimination and religious freedom. It's either freedom or dictation.

Its history demonstrates that the government has always won against the Church.

First, polygamy, plural marriage, celestial marriage, whatever you want to call it, should have been protected by the First Amendment (a conscientious and voluntary religious practice that did not infringe on anyone else's rights). Brigham Young and many of his brethren even went to great lengths to preach and establish it as central and essential to our doctrine of exaltation, i.e. they taught many times, in official capacity and authority, in public, in the name of the Lord, in general conference settings that it was essential to exaltation and even prophesied in the name of the Lord that it would never be done away, that the Lord would destroy the United States government before he or the Church would bend or withdraw the eternal principle. They apparently spoke, however authoritatively, in error (on the Lord's behalf - i.e. the Lord God does not speak in error) because the truth is history. The U.S. government, however unconstitutionally, relentlessly and successfully pursued the cessation of the practice until it was finally done away. Bottom line, the Church changes both its doctrine and its practice. This can't be denied without dishonesty. Is anyone going to continue to argue this? I'm sorry.

Second, blacks and the priesthood: the Church discriminated against blacks in both doctrine and practice, tentatively in the JS era and positively from the BY era and on. The Church prohibited their receiving Melchizedek Priesthood and temple ordinances, but permitted baptism and sacrament. Call it what you will, partial discrimination or whatever, but it is very similar to the current LGBT issue. What happened? When the civil rights movement gained momentum and traction, the Church foresaw what would happen if it did not change - it would again face overwhelming legal pressure and/or censure. End result? Both our doctrine and practice changed to conform.

So the real test for the Church with the LGBT issue, and the law of chastity and current definition of marriage (even with thousands of years of history backing them), will be when the government recognizes LGBT as a protected class and sexual orientation and marriage as human rights. If this occurs, the legal pressure to eliminate any form of discrimination against LGBT's, whether on religious grounds or not, will become heavy. What will the Church do then? Hopefully not change its doctrine or practice.

And, unfortunately, these examples of how our government has and is willing to trample religious freedom in favor of both public opinion (right or wrong) and other agendas, despite the Constitution, does not bode well for the future. The Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. The Church's track record is not perfect at sticking to its guns, right or wrong as you may see it. When the political and financial pressure has been turned on; when the barrels of the U.S. government have pointed (or were about to point) at it, it has chosen self-preservation over whatever doctrine or practice was threatening its existence.

I don't like it, but that's history. The other interpretations I've seen, however faithful, deny too many plain facts.

The real question now is what is the Lord's will and will we, as a church (this depends on the leaders since it is a theocracy), and as individuals, do His will whatever the consequences? Is the law of chastity, no sexual relations except between husband and wife married, and marriage only between man and woman (I would say one man and one woman, because polygamy already lost) - are these eternal and unchanging principles and practices? If they are, and the Church has clearly taught that they are, it would constitute another historically huge change if they bent or broke on these. For me, it would be a deal-breaker with the Church, i.e. we would part ways. I'm sticking with the Lord no matter what.

I could be wrong about many things.

Lizzy60 wrote:And what are you going to do about Heather and her two mommies showing up for the Primary activity day?

Phoenixstar117 wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:And what are you going to do about Heather and her two mommies showing up for the Primary activity day?

And how will you explain that to the other kiddies without making heather a bad person by association?

Phoenixstar117 wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:And what are you going to do about Heather and her two mommies showing up for the Primary activity day?

And how will you explain that to the other kiddies without making heather a bad person by association?

The other Primary kids have seen so many gay-parent families on their TV shows by now, that they won't need an explanation. In fact, they will soon wonder why all the old folks have a problem with it. And soon, they will feel that it's wrong for us to deny them access to the temple, etc. Slippery slope. Pink Death says her fave TV show is Modern Family, so she should see how this will all play out. We will just say that God loves everyone, and who are we to judge.

Lizzy60 wrote:In fact, they will soon wonder why all the old folks have a problem with it.

Muerte Rosa wrote:My kids watch sponge Bob.

Muerte Rosa wrote:I watch spongebob by myself. It's hilarious. If there is a lot with the innuendos, I'm not picking up on them and i have a somewhat aberrant mind. Lol

Muerte Rosa wrote:Well don't look it up then bozo lol

Muerte Rosa wrote:Procreation or at least attempting to...is a commandment. Will that change? Having sex with ANYONE of any sex outside of marriage...is against the law of chastity. Will that change? Not according to God. And if the church did change their stance on those things...that's where you would see me step away. Commandments that have been around since the beginning are not going anywhere. What has the church changed their stance on that is an age old commandment ? None that I'm aware of. Polygamy was a recent one. Not age old world wide commandment. Black people and the priesthood that's something totally different. The church has NEVER changed their stance on major moral issues where we go from not doing something that is seen as immoral to it being ok to do it all of a sudden.

Col. Flagg wrote:

jimmy wrote:If the Church changes it's stance on Gay marriage then it will be called just a church not Jesus Christ's Church.
I won't have to leave the church if it happens, the church will have left me.

It will never happen... I think the brethren are wise enough to never allow public or political pressure to persuade them to accept gay marriage when it is 100% in opposition to God's law and his plan of salvation. I'm confident that they are more fearful of the Lord's wrath than anything man can do to persecute. But I don't think it's even crossed their minds to even consider condoning gay marriage. And here's a question I've had for a long time... how is it possible for two people of the same sex to have 'sexual relations'? The term 'sex' (as in 'intercourse') is not possible other than between a man and woman.

coachmarc wrote:The church has been changing for 170+ years.

Benjamin_LK wrote:

coachmarc wrote:The church has been changing for 170+ years.

It has been maturing for 170+ years.